The situation at Malta Drydocks

I had reacted to the editorial "A Mickey Mouse Country" for the simple reason that The Times harshly and unjustly criticised the GWU and the Drydocks workers for the situation at the Malta Drydocks.

The response to my reaction to the editorial was timed, with 10 days allowed to lapse to coincide with the very same day that the industrial tribunal was to hear the final submissions.

In the editorial of August 7, accusations were replicated against both the GWU and the Drydocks' workers that they were reducing the country to a state of ridicule.

However, it was The Times which first labelled this country "A Mickey Mouse country".

Is it possible The Times does not know that workers have legal and legitimiate rights to defend their own interests and to struggle to improve their working conditions?

Is it possible The Times is so naïve about industrial relations that there is no understanding of the responsibility of trade unions to take up their members' cases whenever these crop up, and even individual cases?

We cannot understand why, each time the GWU comes out to defend the workers' interests it will be blatantly insulted and accused of acting politically. It is The Times that has turned itself into a political machine, not us.

In order to insult the GWU and the Drydocks workers, The Times conveniently omitted to mention the shocking squandering of Drydocks' funds. Of course, this spending spree is not being done by the workers so it is convenient for you to let it persist, through silence and also to hide it from the public eye.

The Times should stay away from matters it is not familiar with. The Times is not entitled to hurt and insult the Drydocks workers. The guts of the Drydocks workers are not of chickens but of vultures.